2021 Off-Season (Too Soon?)

[Gniwder 168]

17 minutes ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

This was his first season as a full time center that he didn't finish in the top 30 among centers, I believe. I don't think its fair to remove him from 1C status based on just 1 year.

The center you would get back would be less than Larkin. You're improving a position of strength while depleting a position of weakness.

Tied with 3 others for #33 last year in PPG among centers league wide who played 50 games or more.

Larkin literally has only 1 season where he scored among the top 30.

73 in '19!!! Wooooo

 

5 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

You know who else "hopes" (sees) this in Larkin? Yzerman. Larkin will remain THIS team's 1C for the foreseeable future.

He'll be traded as soon as Yzerman's deems Seider ready. Don't forget Seider is an Yzerman boy. Larkin is from the bygone Holland era.

Edited June 4, 2021 by Gniwder

[krsmith17 7,191]

11 minutes ago, Gniwder said:

He'll be traded as soon as Yzerman's deems Seider ready. Don't forget Seider is an Yzerman boy. Larkin is from the bygone Holland era.

Our 1D is ready! Time to trade our 1C. Sound logic there bud...

[Gniwder 168]

1 minute ago, krsmith17 said:

Our 1D is ready! Time to trade our 1C 2C. Sound logic there bud...

FIFY

Ras and Veleno will make Larkin expendable very soon

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

4 hours ago, Gniwder said:

Tied with 3 others for #33 last year in PPG among centers league wide who played 50 games or more.

Larkin literally has only 1 season where he scored among the top 30.

73 in '19!!! Wooooo

 

He'll be traded as soon as Yzerman's deems Seider ready. Don't forget Seider is an Yzerman boy. Larkin is from the bygone Holland era.

I dont know where you get your stats, but Larkin finished 89th in 16/17 (his first season at center I believe) 28th in 17/18, 24th in 18/19 and 29th in 19/20 among centers. And I am including not only full time centers, but any forward who averages more time at C than W.

He finished 76th this season after playing in only 44 games due to injury. His PPG average would have put him at 30 points if he played a full season which would have put him in the 50's. Not 1C numbers obviously, but still 2C.

Larkin has been a low end 1C for the previous 3 seasons, and even in a down year, he was still at a 2C level. Exactly where most people put him.

4 hours ago, Gniwder said:

FIFY

Ras and Veleno will make Larkin expendable very soon

No one in their right mind thinks Ras or Veleno will ever be a 1C. Love to be wrong tho.

[Dabura 12,207]

1 hour ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

I dont know where you get your stats, but Larkin finished 89th in 16/17 (his first season at center I believe) 28th in 17/18, 24th in 18/19 and 29th in 19/20 among centers. And I am including not only full time centers, but any forward who averages more time at C than W.

He finished 76th this season after playing in only 44 games due to injury. His PPG average would have put him at 30 points if he played a full season which would have put him in the 50's. Not 1C numbers obviously, but still 2C.

Larkin has been a low end 1C for the previous 3 seasons, and even in a down year, he was still at a 2C level. Exactly where most people put him.

No one in their right mind thinks Ras or Veleno will ever be a 1C. Love to be wrong tho.

I'm kind of tired of defending Larkin's honor. However, it's worth noting Yzerman did confirm in his end-of-season presser that he wants Larkin to be a Selke type guy, isn't concerned about Larkin's less-than-stellar production (because Selke type guy), and feels Larkin's production will improve as the team around him improves. Which is what I and others have been saying.

Realistically, the team Yzerman's building isn't going to be a high-octane offensive juggernaut. Which is fine by me. We just witnessed the Habs beclown the Leafs with a center group of Danault-Suzuki-Kotkaniemi-Staal. And the Habs have taken the first two games against the Jets. Meanwhile, McDavid and Matthews are golfing.

It all comes down to knowing what your team's strengths and shortcomings are; implementing systems that maximize your team's strengths and minimize your team's weaknesses; and getting your players to buy in and embrace their roles. If you have that and sneaky-good depth, you have a shot at winning a Cup.

[Gniwder 168]

2 hours ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

I dont know where you get your stats, but Larkin finished 89th in 16/17 (his first season at center I believe) 28th in 17/18, 24th in 18/19 and 29th in 19/20 among centers. And I am including not only full time centers, but any forward who averages more time at C than W.

He finished 76th this season after playing in only 44 games due to injury. His PPG average would have put him at 30 points if he played a full season which would have put him in the 50's. Not 1C numbers obviously, but still 2C.

Larkin has been a low end 1C for the previous 3 seasons, and even in a down year, he was still at a 2C level. Exactly where most people put him.

No one in their right mind thinks Ras or Veleno will ever be a 1C. Love to be wrong tho.

The official spot. NHL.com.

• 2015/16: Larkin finishes 65th among league centers in PPG (excluding centers who played less than 50 games)
• 2016/17: Larkin ties for 95th-98th (same parameters) with Devin Shore and Jean-Gabriel Pageau
• 2017/18: Ties for 33rd-34th with Ryan Nugent-Hopkins
• 2018/19: Ties for 19th-22nd with Lindholm, Hertl, and Duchene
• 2019/20: Ties for 32nd-33rd with Logan Couture
• 2020/21: Ties for 67th-73rd with Chytil, Eller, Pageau, Statsny, Kempe, Wennberg (excluding centers who played less than 30 games)

His average career finish (taking the highest number from ties) and excluding his first two seasons is: 38th

You guys literally love to call him a legit 1C because of 1 season out of 6 where he tied with Duchene, Hertl, and Lindholm. This is clearly a 2C. 3/4 of the last seasons tell you this. He's 25 now and has 6 seasons under his belt. And he's not improving anymore, in fact he's declining on the stat sheet. Don't feed me the excuse of the team sucks, cause we've watched talented players around him and on his line score. Will he jump back up to the 30-40 center range this next year? Quite possibly. But that's 2C level. Call a spade a spade.

IMO the most egregious error a team can make is unreliably assessing the talent you have or will have (scouting). This is the bread and butter of any organization. Teams that can't do this effectively operate in a fog of war that leads to bad trades and utilizing talent improperly.

If you don't think Ras or Veleno have true 2C potential then they should both be traded immediately while they still have value and potential as prospects. I say this because Larkin is also a bonafide 2C. And if Ras and/or Veleno can't replace him I'd rather keep Larkin. I think Ras is going to do very well for the Red Wings though. He took very large steps as a 21 year old this year. Larkin should worry about his job.

[ely s 457]

To assess Larkin through his ppg rate is a bit thin. He is playing on one of the worst teams in the last 5 years, was forced to play against the best night in night out and his support cast was let´s say mediocre and often hit by injuries. As SY said in his final presser, the points will come once the support cast is better and no one can argue that his two way play or work ethic is not were it needs to be.

[diehardredwingsfan58 123]

On 5/27/2021 at 9:07 AM, Gniwder said:

IDK, everyone said the same thing about Svechnikov, and he cleared twice I think last season... and one of the times I think he had 5 pts in 10 games.

I think Lindstrom would clear. IDK about Smith and Cholo. Toss up. Smith might be the most dangerous one to waiver.

I think GMs were concerned with Svechnikov's injuries. I can see Lindstrom possibly clearing. Not really sure about either Cholowski or Smith though.

On 6/4/2021 at 5:17 PM, Gniwder said:

FIFY

Ras and Veleno will make Larkin expendable very soon

You can't be serious, because neither Ras nor Veleno are even remotely in Larkins league. I'd be happy if Veleno turns out to be half the player Larkin is. And Ras not even going to go there.

[Akakabuto 1,749]

5 hours ago, diehardredwingsfan58 said:

And Ras not even going to go there.

I wouldn't rule it out. Whats seperates Larkin is his "motor". Rasmussens talent level is certainly up there(with Larkin). Ras development path took a detour because of how he was thrown into the NHL too early. In hindsight he should have stayed one more year being a full time center in the WHL before making the jump to GRG/DRW. 

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

On 6/5/2021 at 12:13 AM, Dabura said:

I'm kind of tired of defending Larkin's honor. However, it's worth noting Yzerman did confirm in his end-of-season presser that he wants Larkin to be a Selke type guy, isn't concerned about Larkin's less-than-stellar production (because Selke type guy), and feels Larkin's production will improve as the team around him improves. Which is what I and others have been saying.

Realistically, the team Yzerman's building isn't going to be a high-octane offensive juggernaut. Which is fine by me. We just witnessed the Habs beclown the Leafs with a center group of Danault-Suzuki-Kotkaniemi-Staal. And the Habs have taken the first two games against the Jets. Meanwhile, McDavid and Matthews are golfing.

It all comes down to knowing what your team's strengths and shortcomings are; implementing systems that maximize your team's strengths and minimize your team's weaknesses; and getting your players to buy in and embrace their roles. If you have that and sneaky-good depth, you have a shot at winning a Cup.

He is a poor man's 1C. He is not elite, but certainly better than your average 2C.

If we could draft and develop a center better than Dylan Larkin and drop him to the 2C spot, that would be great; but the idea that this team HAS TO, is problematic. If we had 2 Larkin caliber centers on the top 2 lines, this team would be fine. You can win with that, so long as you have the complimentary wingers to go with them (presumably we do).

The knock on Larkin's scoring is also biased. Do even his biggest critics think he wouldn't be a top 15 or 20 scoring center if he had Patrick Kane on his wing? And yet he finishes in the 30's in points among centers without ever having a winger eclipsing the 25 goal mark, and he's a 2C? 

The way I see it, he's a 2nd tier 1C. Larkin is not elite, and will never generate a lot of scoring on his own. But give him at least one bonafide scorer on his wing, and he will be a perennial 65 to 70 point center. And the same could be said about a good portion of NHL centers deemed worthy of the title "1C".

Edited June 6, 2021 by Neomaxizoomdweebie

[Dabura 12,207]

46 minutes ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

He is a poor man's 1C. He is not elite, but certainly better than your average 2C.

If we could draft and develop a center better than Dylan Larkin and drop him to the 2C spot, that would be great; but the idea that this team HAS TO, is problematic. If we had 2 Larkin caliber centers on the top 2 lines, this team would be fine. You can win with that, so long as you have the complimentary wingers to go with them (presumably we do).

The knock on Larkin's scoring is also biased. Do even his biggest critics think he wouldn't be a top 15 or 20 scoring center if he had Patrick Kane on his wing? And yet he finishes in the 30's in points among centers without ever having a winger eclipsing the 25 goal mark, and he's a 2C? 

The way I see it, he's a 2nd tier 1C. Larkin is not elite, and will never generate a lot of scoring on his own. But give him at least one bonafide scorer on his wing, and he will be a perennial 65 to 70 point center. And the same could be said about a good portion of NHL centers deemed worthy of the title "1C".

Yup, I agree with all of this.

I've said this a number of times and I'll say it again: Jonathan Toews has never been a monster scorer, and that's with *PATRICK KANE* glued to his hip for the entirety of his career.

Larkin's had good-not-great talent on his wings, absolutely zero help behind him on the center depth chart, and an ocean of ass behind him on the blue line. Every team's game plan against the Wings is three words: "Shut down Larkin." That's it. It's all they have to do.

Larkin's not the kind of player who can put up a ton of points with no help. For a guy who was billed as "Darren Helm with hands," that doesn't come as a huge surprise. HOWEVER, what Larkin's been able to do with the lack of high-quality help is pretty impressive and suggests the best is yet to come.

[marcaractac 3,962]

s***, Bergeron didn't start hitting ppg numbers until he was flanked by Pasta and Marchand.

[mackel 679]

Larkin ain't no Bergeron.  With or without wingers of your choosing.

[Dabura 12,207]

1 hour ago, mackel said:

Larkin ain't no Bergeron.  With or without wingers of your choosing.

Fair. But the point isn't that Larkin is Bergeron. Rather, the point is that if you put Marchand and Pastrnak on Larkin's wings, the "Larkin is a wholly inadequate 1C" criticism likely disappears.

[marcaractac 3,962]

10 hours ago, Dabura said:

Fair. But the point isn't that Larkin is Bergeron. Rather, the point is that if you put Marchand and Pastrnak on Larkin's wings, the "Larkin is a wholly inadequate 1C" criticism likely disappears.

This.

[Gniwder 168]

On 6/5/2021 at 7:04 AM, ely s said:

To assess Larkin through his ppg rate is a bit thin. He is playing on one of the worst teams in the last 5 years, was forced to play against the best night in night out and his support cast was let´s say mediocre and often hit by injuries. As SY said in his final presser, the points will come once the support cast is better and no one can argue that his two way play or work ethic is not were it needs to be.

Completely disagree. A 1C's job is to generate points - a lot of points - and also to do that while dealing with often the toughest matchup trying to shut u down. If larks cant handle that responsibility hes not a true 1C.

Furthermore we've watched Larkins linemates excel and grow. Bertuzzi, Mantha (except this season) Fabbri, Zadina, and now Vrana. Yet Larkin regresses while they develop. So your theory about its just his weak ass linemates, isnt at all true. 

Larkin is an impressively fast, defensively capable, top 6 center. He does not possess the play making ability to ever be a true backbone 1C in this league. 

 

[Gniwder 168]

17 hours ago, Dabura said:

Fair. But the point isn't that Larkin is Bergeron. Rather, the point is that if you put Marchand and Pastrnak on Larkin's wings, the "Larkin is a wholly inadequate 1C" criticism likely disappears.

Sure but your essentially arguing:

>lets mask Larkins deficiencies by propping him up with not 1 but 2 elite wingers.

Id rather just address the truth of the situation now instead of banking on maybe having multiple elite wingers one day to save larkins 1C position. 

[marcaractac 3,962]

12 minutes ago, Gniwder said:

Sure but your essentially arguing:

>lets mask Larkins deficiencies by propping him up with not 1 but 2 elite wingers.

Id rather just address the truth of the situation now instead of banking on maybe having multiple elite wingers one day to save larkins 1C position. 

This is why we need a high end skilled center to complement Larkin in the top 6. 

[kipwinger 8,520]

My two cents. Judging a guy's correct role on a team by the points he scores can be misleading. Especially when you're talking about the linemate/ice time effect. Remember when Ian White came to Detroit and immediately had a career best year because he was paired with Lidstrom? Sure looked like the expanded role and better partner upped his game. But did it really? Probably not. He was never a top pair defenseman, despite Lidstrom dragging him around the ice. His improved stats only obscured the fact that we now had a bum on our top pair and the team was worse off for it.

Same with Abdelkader riding shotgun with Datsyuk. Sure his stats improved, anybody's would have. But was the team better for having a 3-4th line tweener on the top line? Nope.

Whether or not Larkin scores 50, 60, or 70 pts., he's not the kind of player that drives play at both ends of the ice if his offense is reliant on his linemates. And that's the type of guy you probably don't call a 1C. Or rather, if it takes Bertuzzi and Mantha/Vrana to get Larkin to 70(ish) points then imagine how much a real playmaking center would score with them?

In an ideal situation you'd have a line with an offensively capable center, and offensively capable wingers, and that line would score a lot. And then a Bertuzzi-Larkin-??? line that scores at a solid, but unspectacular, rate and can match up with top lines. That creates a competitive advantage. Giving really great offensive opportunities to a line centered by Larkin is a bad idea if you've got better alternatives. 

[Gniwder 168]

43 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

My two cents. Judging a guy's correct role on a team by the points he scores can be misleading. Especially when you're talking about the linemate/ice time effect. Remember when Ian White came to Detroit and immediately had a career best year because he was paired with Lidstrom? Sure looked like the expanded role and better partner upped his game. But did it really? Probably not. He was never a top pair defenseman, despite Lidstrom dragging him around the ice. His improved stats only obscured the fact that we now had a bum on our top pair and the team was worse off for it.

Same with Abdelkader riding shotgun with Datsyuk. Sure his stats improved, anybody's would have. But was the team better for having a 3-4th line tweener on the top line? Nope.

Whether or not Larkin scores 50, 60, or 70 pts., he's not the kind of player that drives play at both ends of the ice if his offense is reliant on his linemates. And that's the type of guy you probably don't call a 1C. Or rather, if it takes Bertuzzi and Mantha/Vrana to get Larkin to 70(ish) points then imagine how much a real playmaking center would score with them?

In an ideal situation you'd have a line with an offensively capable center, and offensively capable wingers, and that line would score a lot. And then a Bertuzzi-Larkin-??? line that scores at a solid, but unspectacular, rate and can match up with top lines. That creates a competitive advantage. Giving really great offensive opportunities to a line centered by Larkin is a bad idea if you've got better alternatives. 

The moment you find urself making excuses for players you should ask yourself "why the f*** am i doing this?" "Am i being a slappy fan boy?"

I knew a guy who worked for olympia entertainment and he said the illitches specifically do not hire anyone who has any kinda fandom for the teams. Clouds judgment. Stop being larkin fans and evaluate him like u would a dallas star player... then ull realize his true nature.

 

[kipwinger 8,520]

27 minutes ago, Gniwder said:

The moment you find urself making excuses for players you should ask yourself "why the f*** am i doing this?" "Am i being a slappy fan boy?"

I knew a guy who worked for olympia entertainment and he said the illitches specifically do not hire anyone who has any kinda fandom for the teams. Clouds judgment. Stop being larkin fans and evaluate him like u would a dallas star player... then ull realize his true nature.

 

Yup. I think that Larkin can be an extremely useful player on a Cup winning team. I just think you need someone offensive to run out there in cases were you HAVE to generate offense, because that's not Dylan's game (as evidenced by the fact that he scores all his points in transition).

Here's Kipwinger's guide to making the Red Wings great again:

1: Draft Kent Johnson or William Eklund at 6th overall with the intent that they're going to be your "offensive" center. Take your time developing them, especially Johnson (who needs to grow).

2: Trade Nashville for Ryan Johansen. For the time being he'll be a good 2C and help pull this team out of the dumpster. As Johnson/Eklund come online move Johansen down to 3C, or maybe even trade him if Niederbach turns out better (and quicker) than expected.

3: Acquire Zach Werenski. Surely he wants out of Columbus and he's set to be an RFA next year. So maybe look to trade for him then. If Columbus refuses to trade him then surely he'll take them to arbitration and he'll be a UFA three seasons from now.

4: Trade Robby Fabbri and the worse of Berggren/Zadina no sooner than the offseason after next year. They'll be redundant. Perhaps for a quality goalie.

Year 1 Lineup:

Bert-Larkin-Vrana

Veleno-Johansen-Zadina

Fabbri-Ras-Nemestnikov

Smith-Glendening-Svech (or whomever).

 

DK-Hronek

Staal (or whomever) - Seider

Cholo-Stecher

 

Year 3-4 Lineup:

Bert-Larkin-Raymond

Veleno-Johnson/Eklund-Vrana

Ras-Johansen-Zadina/Berggren

Pearson-Glendening-Smith

 

Werenski-Seider

Johansson-Hronek

Viro - McIsaac

Edited June 7, 2021 by kipwinger

[ely s 457]

1 hour ago, kipwinger said:

Giving really great offensive opportunities to a line centered by Larkin is a bad idea if you've got better alternatives.

that´s where our biggest problem lies. We don´t have better alternatives and unless some miracle happens or we trade for Jack Eichel or find some unknown hidden gem we have to live with Larkin and that´s ok, could be worse. We just have to make sure he´s going to get help on the wings, which might be easier than finding a better center.

[kipwinger 8,520]

7 minutes ago, ely s said:

that´s where our biggest problem lies. We don´t have better alternatives and unless some miracle happens or we trade for Jack Eichel or find some unknown hidden gem we have to live with Larkin and that´s ok, could be worse. We just have to make sure he´s going to get help on the wings, which might be easier than finding a better center.

I don't agree. I don't think we need an elite center. I think we could get by with a guy who's really good offensively, but isn't that great defensively. I'm thinking of someone like Elias Pettersson here. He's not a top 5-10 center in the league, but he can generate offense when you need it. And I don't think it's unrealistic to think that Kent Johnson, William Eklund, or Chaz Lucius could be a player like that for us.

[mackel 679]

2 hours ago, Gniwder said:

Completely disagree. A 1C's job is to generate points - a lot of points - and also to do that while dealing with often the toughest matchup trying to shut u down. If larks cant handle that responsibility hes not a true 1C.

Furthermore we've watched Larkins linemates excel and grow. Bertuzzi, Mantha (except this season) Fabbri, Zadina, and now Vrana. Yet Larkin regresses while they develop. So your theory about its just his weak ass linemates, isnt at all true. 

Larkin is an impressively fast, defensively capable, top 6 center. He does not possess the play making ability to ever be a true backbone 1C in this league. 

 

This

[Dabura 12,207]

3 hours ago, Gniwder said:

Sure but your essentially arguing:

>lets mask Larkins deficiencies by propping him up with not 1 but 2 elite wingers.

Id rather just address the truth of the situation now instead of banking on maybe having multiple elite wingers one day to save larkins 1C position. 

I guess I'm just not understanding why we need to be having hard conversations about Larkin at this time.

Would I like to have a 1C who's significantly better than Larkin? Sure. Do I have a foolproof plan for acquiring that player? Nope.

I'm assuming we're not getting that player. And I'm saying that's not necessarily a bad thing. If we can instead simply find a centerman who's about as good as Larkin overall but maybe more of a natural scorer, that could be enough.